R v C

Case [2000] QCA 145 28 April 2000

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: R v C [2000] QCA 145

PARTIES: THE QUEEN
v
C
(appellant)

FILE NO: CA No 391 of 1999
DC No 209 of 1998

DIVISION: Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING: Appeal against Conviction & Sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court at Rockhampton

DELIVERED ON: 28 April 2000

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

HEARING DATE: 22 March 2000

JUDGES: McMurdo P, Moynihan SJA, Atkinson J
Judgment of the Court

ORDER: Appeal against conviction dismissed.
Leave to appeal against sentence refused.

CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE – WHETHER INSUFFICIENT PARTICULARITY – sexual offences against step-grand-daughter between ages 6 to 11 – whether similar counts adequately particularised so discrete and specific incidents

R v Knuth CA No 64 of 1998, 23 June 1998, considered
R v Rogers CA No 17 of 1998 and CA No 445 of 1997, 6 May 1998, considered
R v S [2000] 1Qd R 445, considered
S v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 266, considered

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE – IMPROPER ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE – whether trial judge erred in admitting evidence of uncharged acts of indecency and an out of court statement.

R v Knuth CA No 64 of 1998, 23 June 1998, considered

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – USE OF EVIDENCE – whether trial judge failed to give adequate directions to jury on evidence of uncharged acts, an out of court statement and absence of evidence from a witness.

Gipp v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 106, considered
Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, considered
R v McKinney (1991) 171 CLR 468, considered
R v Palmer CA No 125 of 1998, 28 July 1998, distinguished
R v Rankin [2000] QCA 54; CA No 234 of 1999, 3 March 2000, considered
R v Vonarx Court of Appeal (Vic) No 181 of 1995, 15 November 1995, considered

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – WHERE APPEAL DISMISSED – whether the delay in making the complaint or the lack of fresh complaint, corroboration or particularity made the verdict unsafe or unsatisfactory.

Criminal Code s 632

Gipp v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 106, considered
M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487, considered
Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439, considered

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSON – APPLICATION TO REDUCE SENTENCE – WHEN REFUSED – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – SEXUAL OFFENCES – whether sentence of five years' imprisonment with…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v C

Details

AGLC: R v C [2000] QCA 145
Case: [2000] QCA 145
Decision Date: 28 April 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v C, the appellant was convicted for multiple sexual offences against his step-grand-daughter, committed when she was between the ages of six and eleven. The appellant appealed against both his conviction and sentence, contending that there was a miscarriage of justice and that the charges were insufficiently particularised. The appeal against the conviction was heard in the Court of Appeal of a relevant Australian state.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether the charges against the appellant were adequately particularised. The appellant argued that the similar fact evidence provided was insufficient to support the conviction as it did not specify discrete and specific incidents. The Crown contended that the charges were particular enough, and that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the conviction.

The court found that the charges against the appellant were sufficiently particularised. It was held that the similar fact evidence provided was relevant and admissible, and the court was satisfied that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The court found that the appellant's arguments on particularity did not establish a miscarriage of justice. The appeal against the conviction was dismissed, and leave to appeal against the sentence was refused.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal against conviction dismissed.

Leave to appeal against sentence refused.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v C [2000] QCA 145

Most Recent Citation

R v R [2001] QCA 488

Cases citing this decision · 16 of 16 shown

R v Simpson
[2023] QSCPR 13 Para 1

…[2000] QCA 145 at [3].…
Taylor v Commissioner of Police
[2022] QDC 101 Para 16

…fence to make forensic judgements in relation to the cross-examination of witnesses; and the gathering and calling of its own evidence.[10] [9] R v C [2000] QCA 145 at [3]; R v Logan [2012] QCA 210 at [102]. [10] Patel v The Queen (2012) 247 CLR 531; R v Knight [2022] QCA 31.…
R v Knight
[2022] QCA 31 Para 24

…J’s point that without particulars the prosecution can be as unsure of the case being run as is the court and the defendant.” [46] R v C [2000] QCA 145, at [3]. [47] Patel v The Queen (2012) 247 CLR 531; [2012] HCA 29, at [168]. Internal citations omitted.…
R v FAK
[2016] QCA 306 Para 31

…ding: R v GY [2007] QCA 103; R v SAG [2004] QCA 286; R v MAH [2005] QCA 13; R v L [2002] QCA 268; R v SAH [2004] QCA 329; R v M [2003] QCA 443; R v C [2000] QCA 145; R v S [2001] QCA 54; R v R [2001] QCA 488. [139] HAN at [13], per A Lyons J, Muir JA and White J concurring. “The authorities the sentencing Judge w…
R v GW
[2015] QDC 240

…Court of New South Wales & Ors (1989) 168 CLR 23 Johnson v Miller (1937) 59 CLR 467 R v B; ex parte Attorney-General [2002] 1 Qd R 274 R v C [2000] QCA 145 R v CAZ [2012] 1 Qd R 440 R v F [1994] QCA 537 R v R [1998] QCA 83 R v S [2000] 1 Qd R 445 R v WAB [2008] QCA 107 S v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 266 Walton v G…
R v TY
[2011] QCA 261 Para 1

…t which occurred over a period of approximately three and a half years. The offender had a minor, but not particularly relevant, criminal history. [7][2000] QCA 145.…
R v MBI
[2009] QCA 374 Para 3

…[17][2000] 1 Qd R 445 at 455-456. See also R v C [2000] QCA 145 at [3].…
JG v. Clark
[2008] QDC 240 Para 1

…After the incident, the appellant told her to go and play and that it was “our little secret”.” [3] R v C [2000] QCA 145, paras 6-10.…
R v UC
[2008] QCA 194 Para 1

…fending in those cases. Not the least is the intensity and intrusive nature of the sexual acts, fellatio, digital penetration and masturbation. [30][2000] QCA 145 [31][2001] QCA 54 [32][2001] QCA 488…
R v CAE
[2008] QCA 177

…“In the course of argument reference was made to R v C [2000] QCA 145, R v S [2001] QCA 54 and R v R [2001] QCA 488. The offender in R v C maintained a sexual relationship over a four year period when the complainant was aged six to 11 years. The offending involved touching and digital penetration of the girl's g…
R v HAN
[2008] QCA 106 Para 1

…In R v C [2000] QCA 145 the offender who was sentenced to five years imprisonment had maintained a sexual relationship over a four year period when the complainant was aged six to 11 years and involved touching and digital penetration as well as fellatio.…
R v KS
[2007] QCA 335 Para 1

…judgments in the High Court in S v The Queen (1989-1990) 168 CLR 266 at 274, per Dawson J, and also discussed in the judgment of this Court in R v C [2000] QCA 145. That means that an error of law has been established on Mr KS’s appeal against these convictions. The question then is whether the absence of partic…
R v GY
[2007] QCA 103 Para 1

…In the course of argument reference was made to R v C [2000] QCA 145, R v S [2001] QCA 54 and R v R [2001] QCA 488. The offender in R v C maintained a sexual relationship over a four year period when the complainant was aged six to 11 years. The offending involved touching and digital penetration of the girl's ge…
R v DMP
[2006] QDC 331

…es. The Prosecutor has submitted that the head sentence for count 1 will come in the range of five to six years, relying on Snow [2000] QCA 238 and C [2000] QCA 145. You are not entitled to the same amount of consideration as the offender who turned himself in to police at a time when he was under no suspicion in…
R v Friend
[2002] QCA 471

…Here, the applicant's conduct carried a maximum of 14 years. In R v. Clark [2000] QCA 145, the complainant was aged six to 11 years. She was the step-granddaughter of the accused, who was 68 years old at sentencing, but the offending behaviour was, in some respects, a good deal more serious. The sentence there wa…
R v R
[2001] QCA 488 Para 1

…In R v CB [2000] QCA 145, this court held at 3 –…

View all 16 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 10 of 10 shown

R v Rankin
[2000] QCA 54 Para 1

…could not use this as propensity evidence. There is no substance in any ground of appeal relating to uncharged acts of indecency. [8]See R v Rankin [2000] QCA 54; CA No 234 of 1999, 3 March 2000 at [22].…
RPS v The Queen
[2000] HCA 3 Para 1

…ence of corroboration or fresh complaint. As he was entitled to do, the appellant elected not to call or give evidence.[1] [1]See RPS v The Queen [2000] HCA 3 at [28]; 74 ALJR 449 at 456.…
Gipp v The Queen
[1998] HCATrans 212

…ctions to jury on evidence of uncharged acts, an out of court statement and absence of evidence from a witness. Gipp v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 106, considered Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, considered R v McKinney (1991) 171 CLR 468, considered R v Palmer CA No 125 of 1998, 28 July 1998, distinguished R v Rankin [200…
Vincent Raymond Jones v The Queen
[1997] HCA 56 Para 1

…Code s 668E(1); Gipp v The Queen (supra) at 147-150 per Kirby J. [12] M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 at 493, cf McHugh J at 523; Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439 at 450.…
Jones v The Queen
[1997] HCA 12 Para 1

…ut in the Criminal Code s 668E(1); Gipp v The Queen (supra) at 147-150 per Kirby J. [12] M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 at 493, cf McHugh J at 523; Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439 at 450.…
M v the Queen
[1994] HCA 63 Para 1

…11]Note this is not the statutory test as set out in the Criminal Code s 668E(1); Gipp v The Queen (supra) at 147-150 per Kirby J. [12] M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 at 493, cf McHugh J at 523; Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439 at 450.…
McKinney v The Queen
[1991] HCA 6 Para 1

…reason be thought of, why six years after the dangers of lack of proper recording of police conversations with suspects were underlined in McKinney (1991) 171 CLR 468, the outmoded practice of failing to use a proper method of recording was adopted in the present case.” As the Court said, the lack of proper recording…
Jones v Dunkel
[1959] HCA 9

…out of court statement and absence of evidence from a witness. Gipp v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 106, considered Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, considered R v McKinney (1991) 171 CLR 468, considered R v Palmer CA No 125 of 1998, 28 July 1998, distinguished R v Rankin [2000] QCA 54; CA No 234 of 1999, 3 March 2000, co…
Jones v Dunkel
[1959] HCA 8 Para 1

…nt case.” As the Court said, the lack of proper recording of the alleged conversation was a strong reason to expect Stephens would be called. [10](1959) 101 CLR 298.…
S v the Queen
[1989] HCA 66 Para 1

…e discrete and specific. The events are identified with sufficient particularity. There was no possibility of latent ambiguity. [4] [4] S v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 266 at 274.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 0

No legislation cited in this case.

CITATION:	R v C [2000] QCA 145
PARTIES:	THE QUEEN v C (appellant)
FILE NO:	CA No 391 of 1999 DC No 209 of 1998
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction & Sentence
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Rockhampton
DELIVERED ON:	28 April 2000
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	22 March 2000
JUDGES:	McMurdo P, Moynihan SJA, Atkinson J Judgment of the Court
ORDER:	Appeal against conviction dismissed. Leave to appeal against sentence refused.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE – WHETHER INSUFFICIENT PARTICULARITY – sexual offences against step-grand-daughter between ages 6 to 11 – whether similar counts adequately particularised so discrete and specific incidents R v Knuth CA No 64 of 1998, 23 June 1998, considered R v Rogers CA No 17 of 1998 and CA No 445 of 1997, 6 May 1998, considered R v S [2000] 1Qd R 445, considered S v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 266, considered CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE – IMPROPER ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE – whether trial judge erred in admitting evidence of uncharged acts of indecency and an out of court statement. R v Knuth CA No 64 of 1998, 23 June 1998, considered CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – USE OF EVIDENCE – whether trial judge failed to give adequate directions to jury on evidence of uncharged acts, an out of court statement and absence of evidence from a witness. Gipp v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 106, considered Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, considered R v McKinney (1991) 171 CLR 468, considered R v Palmer CA No 125 of 1998, 28 July 1998, distinguished R v Rankin [2000] QCA 54; CA No 234 of 1999, 3 March 2000, considered R v Vonarx Court of Appeal (Vic) No 181 of 1995, 15 November 1995, considered CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – WHERE APPEAL DISMISSED – whether the delay in making the complaint or the lack of fresh complaint, corroboration or particularity made the verdict unsafe or unsatisfactory. Criminal Code s 632 Gipp v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 106, considered M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487, considered Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439, considered CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE – APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSON – APPLICATION TO REDUCE SENTENCE – WHEN REFUSED – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON – SEXUAL OFFENCES – whether sentence of five years' imprisonment with…